On CNET: Start your holiday tech shopping
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 1 of 14:
Next »
The answer is obvious
Everyone has known the answer to spam for a long time. No one wants to implement it:

1) Have every email go to a digital "Post Office". That Post Office generates an encrypted digital "envelope". At the beginning of each envelope is a counter. Initially the envelope counter is set to 5.

2) At each intermediate station from source to recipient the station subtracts 1 from the counter.

3) When the counter reaches 0 that station performs an envelope verification through the Post Office.

4) Anytime an envelope cannot be verified it simply is discarded on the assumption it is spam. A validated envelope gets reset to 5 and continues on its way.

5) Regarding the "increased overhead" of envelope validation, it would be nowhere near as much as having 75-90% of emails being spam, the current situation. Once this process made spam essentially obsolete the counter could be increased to 7 or higher.

6) Counterfeiting an envelope is a criminal offense, just like counterfeiting stamps or tampering with a postage meter.


PROBLEMS:

1) Who will pay for it? This would require some form of postage. 1 cent per email would be crippling for large non-profit organizations, etc., and third-world businesses.

2) Different countries would want to run their own digital Post Offices, not something run by the U.N., the U.S., or the E.U.

3) Everyone would starting adding their own "little charge" to the postal fee.

4) Having all email run through central government-controlled locations--possibly one per country--would present irresistible opportunities for spying and control of communications.
Posted by: Rick_R   Posted on: 10/08/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

The answer is obvious  Rick_R | 10/08/07
Just Communicate as we do here on Zdnet. Who needs email with Web 2.0?  mighetto | 10/08/07
David, you are so far off...  bjbrock | 10/08/07
Not quite nothing  Yagotta B. Kidding | 10/08/07
Exactly my point  dberlind | 10/08/07
re: Not quite nothing  M.R. Kennedy | 10/09/07
RE: Gates in '04 said 'spam soon to be thing of past' and me on Charlie Ros  none none | 10/08/07
Identify every email owner  charbax@... | 10/08/07
Trying not to be to...  Cardinal_Bill | 10/08/07
Google, Yahoo, MSN shouldn't prosecute  charbax@... | 10/09/07
And I say again, you incorrectly assume they want to end spam.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 10/08/07
And gates' 640KB commandment also proved wrong.  kraterz | 10/08/07
What I find interesting is...  Cardinal_Bill | 10/08/07
RE: Gates in '04 said 'spam soon to be thing of past' and me on Charlie Ros  On Site PC | 10/11/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement
  • Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
  • Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
  • Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More